Transport

Fight night in the Bunnings car park

A 20-year-old man was apprehended for driving with an Alcohol Content (AC) of 0.151 last night (Thursday, November 17) in Canberra’s north.

Around 10.20pm last night, police attended the Bunnings car park in Lathlain Street Belconnen after it was reported that a group of people were fighting and drinking at that location.

Police attended the car park where they spoke to the 20-year-old driver of a white Holden station-wagon, a non-licence holder from NSW. The driver underwent a roadside screening test which returned a positive result. As police were speaking to the man, he ran from them across the car park.

The man was arrested a short distance away and taken to the Belconnen Police Station where a further test revealed his alcohol content (AC) to be 0.151.

The man will be summonsed to appear at the ACT Magistrates Court at a later date where he will face drink-driving, driving while unlicensed, escape custody and resist police charges.

This recent incident comes after Belconnen Patrol members conducted a targeted operation on Thursday morning (November 17) where seven drink-drivers were caught.

Police will continue to target drink-driving until the end of the year.

Escape custody? Raises an interesting question about exactly when you are “in custody”?

You’re in custody when you fail your screening test and they tell you you’re in custody.

But they hadnt arrested him or placed him into custody? They might believe they had, but if they havent told him, then is it so? (If they HAD already arrested him, then why did the next line say they arrested him after the chase?)

As p1 asks though, it does raise an interesting question. Does the failure of a screening test automatically mean youre in police custody, even if youre unaware of that fact? The fact a screening test is being administered does revoke certain other liberties and police liabilities, so it conceivably may follow that such a law exists (if you fail, youre in custody, even if youre not aware of that fact)

But they hadnt arrested him or placed him into custody? They might believe they had, but if they havent told him, then is it so? (If they HAD already arrested him, then why did the next line say they arrested him after the chase?)

They have placed him in custody by advising him of that fact as I stated in my reply. It’s the first thing that’s said after a positive screen as well as advising the screen was positive. Police don’t arrest for PCA, they take a person into custody. Effectively though, it’s the same thing – its just a legal wording thing.

After he runs though they can arrest and handcuff for escaping custody and resisting.

Did anyone see what happened here? Might have been nicked for his own good? But if he had no license and they weren’t able to identify him before he legged it, they have to bring him in to at least find out who he is. And look at what they found. DUI. Not the worst charge you could cop. You don’t have to talk to police ever. But you do have to identify yourself, Name, DOB, Address. That’s it. If they have what they need, silence won’t help you anyway. Best to co operate and at least keep them in a civil mood. Running away is something I would film for a comedy. Very silly.

Escape custody? Raises an interesting question about exactly when you are “in custody”?

You’re in custody when you fail your screening test and they tell you you’re in custody.

But they hadnt arrested him or placed him into custody? They might believe they had, but if they havent told him, then is it so? (If they HAD already arrested him, then why did the next line say they arrested him after the chase?)

As p1 asks though, it does raise an interesting question. Does the failure of a screening test automatically mean youre in police custody, even if youre unaware of that fact? The fact a screening test is being administered does revoke certain other liberties and police liabilities, so it conceivably may follow that such a law exists (if you fail, youre in custody, even if youre not aware of that fact)

This has been explained by myself and Keen Golfer. You’re in custody when you are told you’re in custody. The relevant act allows a police officer to take a person who has failed a screening test into custody for the purpose of breath analysis.

Bunnings has a bad reputation for attracting unsavoury types. Remember the bloke who bashed his kid to death with a frying pan in the Tuggers Bunnings carpark? We should all stay away from Bunnings and the low lifes who go there.

This has been explained by myself and Keen Golfer. You’re in custody when you are told you’re in custody. The relevant act allows a police officer to take a person who has failed a screening test into custody for the purpose of breath analysis.

The arrest came when he tried to do a runner.

So the trick is to do the runner before the test result comes back? That way you haven’t refused the test, and you haven’t escaped custody?

This has been explained by myself and Keen Golfer. You’re in custody when you are told you’re in custody. The relevant act allows a police officer to take a person who has failed a screening test into custody for the purpose of breath analysis.

The arrest came when he tried to do a runner.

So the trick is to do the runner before the test result comes back? That way you haven’t refused the test, and you haven’t escaped custody?

The result comes back almost instantaneously though, so it would be a bit tricky.